Scripture and Light

In the Genesis record, God said, “Let their be light” (Gen 1:3) and that light appears overcoming the darkness, saturating the creation realm with God’s authority.  In Isaiah the Servant of the Lord was promised to be a light both to Israel and to the Nations who were not yet covenanted with God as Israel was,

“I am the Lord, I have called You in righteousness,
I will also hold You by the hand and watch over You,
And I will appoint You as a covenant to the people,
As a light to the nations.” Isaiah 42:6

He says, “It is too small a thing that You should be My Servant
To raise up the tribes of Jacob and to restore the preserved ones of Israel;
I will also make You a light of the nations
So that My salvation may reach to the end of the earth.” Isaiah 49:6

In the Gospel accounts, that Servant of the Lord promised … the Lord Christ is the Redemptive light come to inaugurate a new age, a new realm, and a glorious new day as from the Father of lights (James 1:17). He is the light who enlightens every man (John 1:19) Christ is the new covenant age light that shines in the darkness (John 1:5). The Apostles saw He who was the radiance of the glory of God (Hebrews 1:1) as the glory of the One and only who came from the Father (John 1:1-4). As the age to come Light, the followers of the Lord Christ never walk in darkness (John 8:12). Christ as the Redemptive light of the age to come demonstrated and revealed itself with a white hot intensity at the transfiguration wherein even His clothing became dazzling white (Mark 9:1-4).  In the crucifixion He who is “the Light of the World” is snuffed out and as on cue, the light goes out for three hours Christ (Matthew 27:45). Light is picked up again in John’s Revelation wherein John the Revelator falls as dead as before a super nova God-man (Rev. 1:14-17). Finally, as the Scripture started with light, it forms an inclusio by ending with He who is the light, as it closes with the motif of Christ as the light which illuminates the new Jerusalem.  He who ever was very light of very light remains the light of the world (Rev. 22:4).

R2K Advocate Dr. Rev. Brian Lee and Planned Parenthood II

“But the command to not take a life is not a command to pass a law not to take a life. Nor is it a command to politically agitate or lobby for such a law. Such political activity could be understood to run counter to Paul’s command to church to “live quietly and mind your own affairs” (1 Thessalonians 4:11).”
 
~ Dr. Brian Lee, WSC grad & R2k disciple.

Trump Regnant Follies

“Hillary Clinton I think is a terrific woman. I am biased because I have known her for years. I live in New York. She lives in New York. I really like her and her husband both a lot. I think she really works hard. And I think, again, she’s given an agenda, it is not all of her, but I think she really works hard and I think she does a good job. I like her.”

Donald Trump
To FOX News Info-babe — Greta Van Sustern

1.) I do believe that Donald Trump is controlled opposition. I believe all 17 candidates are controlled opposition. But with Trump it is a little different. I do believe the purpose of his candidacy is to so damage the Republican brand in the minds of zombie Republican voters (who somehow manage to think that the Republican party stands for anything but for profiting the Money Interest and themselves) and so guarantee a Democrat victory (presumably Hillary).  Failing that it is easy to imagine Trump pulling a Ross Perot and running on a third party ticket, thus again insuring a Democrat victory by splitting the Republican party vote.

2.) It is apparent that Roger Ailes and FOX News know this. It explains why FOX was and is committed to destroying the Trump Candidacy. Clearly, from the first question requiring a show of hands to Meagan Kelly’s questioning of Trump, to top FOX News political analyst, Charles Krauthammer, declaring the Trump candidacy dead, to the FOX push polling of Frank Luntz, there was a concerted and obvious effort by FOX to unravel Trump’s legitimacy.

3.) Now, near as I can see, FOX would only do such a thing for two reasons. Either Trump really is a conservative or Trump is a known tool for Democrat ends. FOX news network is a neo-conservative network and so were a genuine conservative (should such a person exist at this level) actually polling the numbers that Trump is polling FOX would have an interest in bringing such a person down. However, clearly Trump is no Conservative. To suggest Trump is a Conservative would be to insist that Miley Cyrus is chaste. Trump is the incarnation of Corporatism Oligarchy. As such, I must conclude that FOX is seeking to destroy Trump because he is a stalking horse for the Democrat left which the Republican neo-con left find unacceptable.

4.) The fact that it is widely known by the inside players that Trump is not a Republican was seen again this past weekend as Presbyterian Seminarian, Eric Erikson, dis-invited Trump from his (Erikson’s) “Red State” candidate Bonanza. One simply does not lock out the front running Republican candidate from Party forums and retain credibility unless one knows that the front running Republican candidate is a poseur. Now some will counter my observation here by pointing out Erikson’s stated reason for dis-inviting Trump, Erikson offered, “It is unfortunate to have to disinvite him [Trump]. But I just don’t want someone on stage who gets a hostile question from a lady and his first inclination is to imply it was hormonal. It just was wrong. I have invited Megyn Kelly to attend in Donald Trump’s place tomorrow night.”   We need to keep in mind though that what a Politician says (and a Politician is what Erikson is in this context) is the reason for doing something and what the real reason is for doing something seldom match.  The fact that Erikson invites Megan Kelly in Trump’s place only underscores my point about Erikson the Politician. (And let’s not ask how any conservative Presbyterian, Seminarian or otherwise, could ever support neo-con Republicans.)

As an aside here, my take on Trump’s comments on Megyn Kelly’s orifice bleeds is a little different. In my view, if you, as a woman, are going to fight with the boys you shouldn’t complain about getting hit. Women who decide to enter the bloody arena that is politics shouldn’t complain when they receive as good as they give. The time honored principle where men must never hit the girl does not apply when the girl is whaling on the guy with brass knuckles. As metaphor this is exactly what Kelly was doing.

5.) If you are a Republican Trump does offer one advantage over the rest of the field. Whereas with the rest of the Republican field one can never be absolutely sure of who the Marionette Master is that is pulling the strings of any particular Republican one might vote for, however, with Trump you can vote directly for the Marionette string puller himself. No nasty middle man marionette politician. Instead. in voting for Trump, you can directly vote for the string puller himself. You might call Trump’s campaign a “populist Fascist” or “populist Corporatist” campaign.

6.) Look for the establishment neo-con (FOX) media to push Carly Fiorina. I suspect with the recent feminist explosion over Trump’s comments about women generally, and Megyn Kelly particularly that Fiorina will quickly become the anti-Trump card played by the neo-con media outlets. A Fiorina candidacy might provide great cat-fight theater if she were to up against Hillary.

7.) It is good to keep in mind when analyzing all this not to take it any more seriously then one might take World Wide Wrestling Federation seriously. This is all canned and the broad contours of the outcome is known before the players even take the stage.

The Untenableness of Neo-Orthodox Theology Exposed

“The (neo-orthodox) theologians stand before the Bible in the expectation that through preaching the words of the Bible will become the word of God as the Bible’s audience encounters them in the written witness to Jesus Christ. Barth is famous for the syollogism, ‘The Word written: the Word preached: the Word revealed.’ In other words the written words of the Bible become the word of God to the Church through the preaching of Jesus Christ. As the Bible engenders faith in Jesus Christ, it becomes the Word of God. Surely it is important to combine Word and Spirit  to know God in Jesus Christ, but to restrict the revelation  of the word of God to the human encounter with God in that preaching locates the Bible’s authority in the Christian’s experience of revelation, not in the Bible’s  divine inspiration of that revelation. God’s Word is God’s Word whether or not it is recognized as such, just as a father and a mother are a child’s parents whether accepted or rejected by the child.

The neo-orthodox tend to distinguish between Jesus Christ as the Word of God and Scripture as a ‘witness’ to the Word of God. Barth grounded his dogmatic theology on an orthodox understanding of Jesus Christ as the embodiment of God and of God’s purpose for humankind, but regrettably not on the whole Bible, which he did not regard as inerrant. According to neo-orthodox theology, biblical statements that do not contribute to the witness to Jesus Christ are not necessarily true. This position is unstable because it exalts Christ by depreciating the text that bears witness to His exaltation. In other words according to the neo-orthodox, one hears the Word of God in the Bible as one hears music on a scratched record. In this way they tend to set up the canon of the message of Jesus Christ (i.e.– The music) as more valuable then the whole canon of Scripture (i.e. — the record); a canon within the canon. This dichotomy creates an unstable theology — evangelical and unorthodox regarding the authority of all of Scripture. A canon-within-a-canon theology ultimately places authority in the audience.”

Bruce Waltke 
An Old Testament Theology — pg. 75-76

A small beef with Waltke, in this otherwise fine quote, is his giving in to feminist theology as seen in his usage of “humankind,” as opposed to “mankind.”

Waltke’s Woolly Headed Thinking

The following quote is written by a Biblical theologian and it shows. Honestly, I think this is not well thought out.

“Biblical theologians differ from dogmaticians in three ways. First, Biblical theologians primarily think as exegetes. not as logicians.”

(So exegesis is done non logically?)

“Secondly, they derive their organizational principles from the Biblical blocks of writings themselves rather than factors external to the text.”

(This is the old “we just let the text speak for itself saw.”)

“Third, their thinking is diachronic — that is, they track the development of theological themes in various blocks of writings. Systematic theologians think more synchronically — that is, they invest their energies on the church’s doctrines, not on the development of religious ideas within the Bible.”

(“We’re more Biblical than you are .. nah nah nah nah nah.”)

Bruce K. Waltke
An OT Theology — pg. 64

I’m not sure many Biblical theologians realize how dependent they are on systematic categories before they even come to the text.

Biblical theologians would not seem to be able to be presuppositionalists. They seem to contend that they just observe the unfolding facts of redemptive history while then allowing a philosophy of fact to emerge. However, Van til was right when he offered that there is no fact without a philosophy of fact.  We need to reiterate again that “Biblical theology” still uses presuppositions and constructs to order their study just like systematic or dogmatic theologians.